Digital architectural competition with BIM

Recently many people have talked with me about digital architectural competitions with BIM. But very few know:

1. Why do digital/BIM architectural competitions?
2. How to do them.

With this post, it will change.

Why do architectural competitions with BIM

Digital processes are extraordinary, I love them, but they are no means to themselves. We always need good reasons to digitalize processes - this usually involves efficiency gains, competitive advantage, peer pressure, or some new possibilities. The big question is the why! For the digital/BIM competition, it's the same. From a clients perspective, there are three reasons to work with BIM, in general, and especially with BIM in competitions:

1. Project quality checks, reducing risks by finding deviations earlier. This goes from looking at models to coloring them by property and rule-based automated checks for data or project quality.?The key is that the client gets support in translating wishes, and requirements into solutions. Maybe I'm old school, but we can learn much from project quality and risk management. BIM is (or can be) one of the measurements to manage risk and increase the probability of success. Checking the areas is one of the best examples of it. How many projects do you know that needed some replanning because of significant unintended changes in the room program?
2. Handing over data to facility management. Or, in the case of the competition, getting the facility managers' or users' input early on - best-case already when setting up the competition documents and later in reviewing the design from a users perspective. Much better and easier doable in 3D models than in 2D plans. There are very few meaningful use cases for a full 3D model in FM (except for very complex buildings with a lot of renovation/reconstruction activity). But handing over information / raw data can be very useful. Most of the time the relevant information is 10-15 attributes by space, and major technical installation.
3. To nudge the market in a more efficient direction. I remember when I worked as an architect, we estimated at least 500 hours of unpaid work per competition ( I think with taking the unpaid overtime into account, it would be more). These are acquisition costs of 50'000 CHF/$/€ in one office for one competition. Let's assume the office wins every tenth competition, and we talk about 500'000 (0.5 million). But it's not only one but ten, sometimes even 100 offices participating in the competition, so we are talking about 5 to 50 Mio/year. It adds up very quickly, and who is paying for it? In the end, the client with the average architectural fees. Therefore as a public owner or private company that builds more than once, there could be an interest in nudging the market! That's one of the drivers of the BIM initiatives in the UK.

Which ones apply to you?

How to get started and find the right project

The usual way I see on the market is to describe the project, the BIM, and the data requirements in many documents. The more paper, the better. You want to be on the safe side so you cover every eventuality. I beg to differ:

The goal of a competition is to find the best project and team. BIM is one tool and should not be in the center. Therefore instead of asking for more, ask for less - just enough that you can make a decision.

In terms of requirements, you know the details best, but documenting them in a detailed structured normalized excel list or even better database is a good start. Avoiding long prose text helps sharpen your thinking and avoids contradictions. Moreover it's the prerequisite for continuous and automated quality checks of these requirements - a quality management measurement.

Often these requirements focus on the spaces. Depending on the project, you can work with types or even specific rooms and their requirements. When you work with types, clarify and insist on exactly these space type names. They are the link between the database and the model. So it should be "Office" instead of "Office John Doe." You only need a unique room ID to link the database with the model in complex projects and later in the process. When this is the case, explain, set the boundaries, and regularly check for fulfillment.

A document will also be necessary, giving a short description sharing the broader picture and explaining the cornerstones of the project (cost targets/budget, time to move in, and the soft factors that are important for users and clients).

Regarding BIM, ask the architect/planner team to present the project as they see fit and as they think is best suited. But explain your automated quality assurance processes in detail so that the team knows why they have to deliver information in a certain way. And tell them precisely the minimal model requirements, together with quality checks. You don't need to tell them how to work, except there is an interface with your work!

Often these modeling requirements for a competition could be:

• A 3d volume model of the whole building is georeferenced. With this model, you can automatically check the building limits and look at the building in the spacial context with AR. For this, geometry is more important than data consistency.
• A spacial model, the 3D geometry as IfcSpace from the rooms. These spaces must be labeled adequately according to the room list/database in the LongName or Description attribute. With this, you can check the spatial requirements. Using abstractBIM you can easily use these spaces to create the necessary consistent 3D models and excel files with a quantity takeoff off spaces, facades, roofs, slabs, coverings and building footprints. Once the data of the different projects has the same format, it's easy to quickly compare the different solutions in numbers. No need to deal with different styles of data quality. Once the process is set up you can only exchange the model data. We guarantee data quality.?
• When you want to optimize buildings in terms of sustainability, ask for the windows as IfcWindow. Again, you can create the simulation model and start running some simulations. E.g., in terms of thermal comfort, materialization, or comparing the proposed solution from the team against some predefined standard solutions - you will quickly identify the potential for optimization - even before you sign a contract. To capture the qualities of the building elements, provide a template for the team to fill out to get information. E.g., in Excel or a database with an online frontend. Just ask for some basic information like:

Proposing to get the information in an excel or a database is a hot topic, and I guess most people will criticize me. The standard BIM dogma is the more information in the model, the better. But back to the basics, what do you use the information for. Probably to compare the different solutions regarding sustainability, life cycle costs, and embodied energy. For this. You will use some calculation tools, and the early BIM model will need a lot of work/rework for these automated checks - time you can easily save by providing the list and setting up an intelligent workflow. Therefore the better approach is:

1. Ask for a minimal standard, like only the spaces, the windows, and the walls, as well as this beforementioned Excel file/Database.
2. Transform this received data automatically into a model suitable for simulations. That's what we are specialists at with the abstractBIM.
3. And do the comparison analysis by yourself (or pay somebody to do it).

When you are a "traditional" owner/owner rep, maybe you think by doing this, I will take on more responsibility; it would be better to ask the different planer teams to do these analytics by themselves. The problem:

• The economic one. The more extra you ask, the more time the teams will spend on the competition, and the higher the hidden costs.
• The comparability one. There is no universal guideline on how to calculate sustainability. Therefore, it's better to look at the relative difference than the absolute numbers.
• Of how you perceive your job. You are the owner, so you have the most interest in the project and are accountable anyway. You will have to delegate some of the tasks to specialists, so these specialists are responsible for doing a proper job - but you are accountable.

How to get started and find the right team

The traditional competition approach is to ask different architects for design proposals, choose one, and start looking for a team. The consequence is:

• The delays till the project starts. (One of the best ways to reduce risks in a project is to deflate projects and remove this none value adding waiting time, called latency.
• The high potential for conflicts between the architect and the owner over the team choice.
• Fewer discussions that are none value-adding.

Instead, make the team decision part of your choice of the project. Ask the team in the competition for a team statement, where they tell you why they are the best fit for you and this specific project. And ask them for an offer outlining how they approach the work, the costs, and the planned schedule. Make it a real competition on the market and let the planners sell themself!

Summary

Instead of every planer team doing more and more in a competition, ask for as little as possible, but hire an expert team that helps you choose the right project. This will cost a little more. At least you will pay directly for it, but in the long term, it will come back quickly, by:

• Changing the overall fee structure of the planning and construction services. And as part of a client organization, you are a long-term player. Remember the hidden cost of not winning projects.
• By better projects and better early-stage decisions.
• Having a very clear-cut path to the next steps in the development process.

When you appreciate my newsletters and me sharing my experience, please like and share. Do you know two people who could be interested or benefit from my content? Please invite them to the newsletter. Thank you!